From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: no need to return rt->dst.error if it is not
 null entry.
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 09:10:38 -0600
Message-ID: <7f404f61-0b9a-b25b-3c15-83395d30641d@gmail.com>
References: <1500562286-14312-1-git-send-email-liuhangbin@gmail.com>
 <CAPwn2JQHyj5gxqTFcJ-u9ABe544ivTBWskQfMgk2a2NirCF5rg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPwn2JTF+j84+Bv4Zn=pqju2tnMuuJrhTr9Un786-PZ0D6af3w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM_iQpUM6m=GvUU0OfwZAFsOGsf1UZmTjmuM9FH2P1iOZP=Svw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170724030907.GC2938@leo.usersys.redhat.com>
 <CAM_iQpW4qj2N77QrCvt9jd6jhOGvyRye8eyBzzk+vXeUi_FaoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170725000849.GD2938@leo.usersys.redhat.com>
 <01b1cd24-ab81-3276-f253-70eef20e550b@gmail.com>
 <20170725073202.GE2938@leo.usersys.redhat.com>
 <9e198c2a-c026-f4bd-f190-8d5a887efe7f@gmail.com>
 <CAJieiUgyHDksxVjoCSz9pxbDy-ZZR9uUWWZXdth0diSKAcvx4Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <64377a01-38df-6d43-16a4-401d426fb9b2@gmail.com>
 <CAM_iQpU5EZr1rtgY8sCBjD=utzmi9c6MQ2xb36iXLk++qSk3WA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@gmail.com>,
        network dev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@cumulusnetworks.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pf0-f193.google.com ([209.85.192.193]:36551 "EHLO
        mail-pf0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751991AbdG1PKg (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 28 Jul 2017 11:10:36 -0400
Received: by mail-pf0-f193.google.com with SMTP id m21so6601384pfj.3
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:10:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpU5EZr1rtgY8sCBjD=utzmi9c6MQ2xb36iXLk++qSk3WA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On 7/27/17 10:56 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 11:49 AM, David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 7/26/17 12:27 PM, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
>>> agreed...so looks like the check in v3 should be
>>>
>>>
>>> +       if ( rt == net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry ||
>>> +            (rt->dst.error &&
>>> + #ifdef CONFIG_IPV6_MULTIPLE_TABLES
>>> +              rt != net->ipv6.ip6_prohibit_entry &&
>>> +              rt != net->ipv6.ip6_blk_hole_entry &&
>>> +#endif
>>> +             )) {
>>>                 err = rt->dst.error;
>>>                 ip6_rt_put(rt);
>>>                 goto errout;
>>>
>>
>> I don't think so. If I add a prohibit route and use the fibmatch
>> attribute, I want to see the route from the FIB that was matched.
> 
> But net->ipv6.ip6_prohibit_entry is not the prohibit route you can
> add in user-space, it is only used by rule actions. So do you really
> want to dump it?? My gut feeling is no, but I am definitely not sure.
> 
> When you add a prohibit route, a new rt is allocated dynamically,
> net->ipv6.ip6_prohibit_entry is relatively static, internal and is the
> only one per netns. (Same for net->ipv6.ip6_blk_hole_entry)
> 
> I think Hangbin's example doesn't have ip rules, so this case
> is not shown up.
> 

Understood. The v4 patch returns getroute to the original behavior. The
original behavior returned a route entry not just an error code. The
following is at 5dafc87f40d7 which the commit before roopa's patch set:

# ip -6 ru add to 6000::/120 prohibit
# ip -6 ro get 6000::1
prohibit 6000::1 from :: dev lo proto kernel src 2001:db8::3 metric
4294967295  error -13 pref medium

# ip -6 ro add vrf red prohibit 5000::1/120
# ip -6 ro get vrf red 5000::1
prohibit 5000::1 from :: dev lo table red src 2001:db8::3 metric 1024
error -13 pref medium

Generically, the only time you get just an error response is when the
lookup fails to find a match and returns the null_entry which has
dst.error = -ENETUNREACH.


Now to your point about the new fibmatch option I have gone back and
forth but in the end I think returning the route associated with the FIB
rule is better than just failing with an error code.

Roopa?